AE911T reaches inflationary limit and names "The General Population" as guilty party

User Name

Remember Me?

Password

Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider
registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.

"A number of hypotheses have been put forth within the 9/11 Truth Movement as to what brought the three World Trade Center towers down on 9/11. Some of them don't hold a candle to the evidence for controlled demolition with the use of explosives and nano-thermite — a theory that AE911Truth has documented and supports.

But the one thing that is agreed upon by everyone in the 9/11 Truth community is that fire could not have been the main cause of the sudden, rapid, and complete destruction of WTC Buildings 1, 2, and 7. We may never know exactly how this crime was accomplished, so all we can do is put the pieces together as best we can. At the same time, we can declare with confidence that the narrative we've been fed by the government is not — and cannot possibly be — true.

The 9/11 Truth Movement is about peeling back the layers of deception and exposing the obvious fabrications. In doing this, we are up against a giant machine whose job it is to make sure the official 9/11 story is the only one that is heard and believed.

One would think that the substantial physical evidence and credible eyewitness testimony alone would prompt people into thinking differently about the events of the day.

Not so. Thus, when the public brushes off our attempts to be heard, we can thank the following guilty parties:

* The US Government: At certain levels, those in the upper echelons of power in Washington, D.C., had to have had some knowledge of what was to happen; at the very least, they allowed the event to take place. After the fact, their official reports on their so-called investigations have been proven to be full of fraudulent claims and omissions of critical data.

* The Media: Rarely do the mainstream media allow the real facts about 9/11 to be presented to their audience. When actual facts are occasionally allowed to filter through the MSM's "fake news," the presenters of these facts are treated as objects of ridicule, and the information they impart is never followed up on or verified by these pretend journalists. Lately, independent online news sites and video makers who dare to find and tell the truth about 9/11 (and other false flags) are being removed at an alarming rate by social media site owners — YouTube being the primary example.

* The Education System: Most students in grade 12 or below weren't alive on September 11, 2001. When their teachers bring up the subject, they defer to the simplistic, government-sanctioned version of events (for example, http://bit.ly/2oW3GX0). Some university professors have been relieved of their teaching posts (and even their tenure) for trying to educate pupils on this politically charged issue.

* The General Population: There seems to have been a major shift in people’s attitudes since 9/11 when it comes to questioning the government in general — from speaking freely about controversial subjects to self-censorship. If one dares express doubts about how the towers came down, he is made to feel unpatriotic. Moreover, so many unconstitutional rights-taking acts have been passed by Congress that the populace is afraid that if they criticize authority figures or question the party line on 9/11, federal agents or state/county/local police (the latter increasingly controlled the feds) will "come and get us and lock us up." Thus, many are wary of even uttering the word "9/11" in polite company.

There are plenty of other institutions to blame for suppressing 9/11 Truth. We who have worked hard to hold some of these entities to account still have some heavy lifting to do. We can't abandon the effort, because the worldwide consequence of doing nothing is more tyranny, more corruption at the top, more loss of privacy and legal rights and peace.

It's up to each of us to decide what role we will play in bringing the truth to light. Of one thing we can be sure: Being open to the truth about 9/11 and being courageous enough to tell that truth isn't an option if we want our children and grandchildren to live in a just, upright society. No, it's not an option. It's a must."

Talk about hitting bottom and still digging. The clown car that is 9/11 Truth just doesn't know when to quit - the tires are flat, its out of gas, gears are grinding, smoke pouring out, the passengers just sit there with their whoopie cushions and palm buzzers and squirting flowers and yet they think they're getting somewhere. Funny as hell.

__________________"There's this thing about being so "open minded" your brain falls out". --Unknown

The General Population: There seems to have been a major shift in people’s attitudes since 9/11 when it comes to questioning the government in general — from speaking freely about controversial subjects to self-censorship.

This clear show their disconnect with reality. Yeah......no one questions or speaks out against the government since 9/11...........

__________________"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

"How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41

It must be tough to compete with "a giant machine whose job it is to make sure the official 9/11 story is the only one that is heard" when all you have is stuff like YouTube; a giant machine whose job it is to let any and every crank trumpet their idiotic 9/11 ideas from the rooftops.

It really is the final straw when even the general population are in on it, though. Like something out of the twilight zone. Imagine what it must cost to pay off hundreds of millions of shills.

I think they've explored new territory in the direction of the inflationary limit. It seems that they're working towards an endgame where concealing the truth about 9/11 becomes not just a purpose, but the primary purpose, not just of the US Government, but of the entire US nation. Even Ryan Mackey didn't foresee them going quite that far.

Dave

__________________Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

All they do is attempt to create doubt in anything which is not coming from the truth movement... Doubt drives their paranoid conspiracy views. They and their supporters are usually ignorant and easily accept what seem possible. They exploit people who don't trust government or media.

Is this, then, their formal complaint that "Everybody got the memo except me!"?

__________________"Political correctness is a doctrine,...,which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."
"I pointed out that his argument was wrong in every particular, but he rightfully took me to task for attacking only the weak points." Myriadhttp://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=6853275#post6853275

Is this, then, their formal complaint that "Everybody got the memo except me!"?

It reminds me of the joke where a motorist hears on traffic radio the warning that someone is driving on the freeway in the wrong direction, and he thinks in bewilderment: "What do they mean, someone - it's thousands!!"

Hey, hang on. Are they trying to make out that all those conspirators are American? What about the rest of us??? Aren't we allowed to be part of the vast imaginary conspiracy too?

I don't know about you, Oystein, but I feel seriously under-appreciated right now.

Dave

__________________Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

A year or so ago I would have argued that point, but having signed up to youtube recently and spending quite a bit of time talking about quite varied political issues there, and finding out for myself just how much anti-semitism there still is around today, I fear you're probably right. 'The Jews' are blamed for everything from pollution to how the milkshakes at McDonald's aren't as tasty as they used to be. Very depressing - I hold on to the hope that most of them are just trolling.

__________________Violence is a weakness, not a strength. - Sylvester McCoy﻿

No, the fries being cooked in vegetable shortening instead of beef tallow is the most depressing. I just listened to a podcast where they re-created the original McDonald's fries and taste-tested people vs. the crap they have today. Trans-fat police are ruining everything.

No, the fries being cooked in vegetable shortening instead of beef tallow is the most depressing. I just listened to a podcast where they re-created the original McDonald's fries and taste-tested people vs. the crap they have today. Trans-fat police are ruining everything.

On the contrary. In yet another McHebrew plot, it's getting bigger. The larger size is designed to keep us fat and complacent while sucking more money from our wallets. Soon we'll see lines of super-sized people waddling into the FEMA camps, their fate sealed.

Does that FB page delete dissenting views? I left a message there thanking the General Populace for stopping the 9/11 movement . I wonder for how long it's going to stay.

Also left a few questions and sarcastic remarks. I'll go prepare some popcorn and await replies.

Edit: oh, and it feels so weird and good to be posting here again. I wish people would go back to posting on forums more instead of Face and Instagram. Imagine that, a web site that isn't driven by greed, and which doesn't siphon facts about you, learn everything about you by means of algorithm, and sell all of it off to greedy corporations. You get to post on forums without having to hook it up to Google, or sell your entire life, or have it manipulate you into staying there for as long as possible. What a strange idea.

__________________In choosing to support humanitarian organizations, it's best to choose those that do not have "militant wings" (Mycroft, 2013)

Couldn't help but notice they said fire could not have brought down the Twin Towers when no one is claiming that just fire brought down the Twin Towers.

16+ years and they still can't get the fundamentals correct.

Boy I sure am late to this party....
Anyhow... the conspiracists have always treated the plane impacts as a non-factor in their "theories". I.E. They grossly underestimate/completely remove from consideration that the impacts contributed to weakening the safety measures that would have otherwise protected the building from the fires, and vice versa.

The field and specialty knowledge deficiencies are too many to count with these claims - as always

Boy I sure am late to this party....
Anyhow... the conspiracists have always treated the plane impacts as a non-factor in their "theories". I.E. They grossly underestimate/completely remove from consideration that the impacts contributed to weakening the safety measures that would have otherwise protected the building from the fires, and vice versa.

The field and specialty knowledge deficiencies are too many to count with these claims - as always

I see the discussions have died down quite alot as of late

The Towers were designed to survive an airplane impact though!

I mean, not the much larger planes that were used in 2001. Nor at upwards of 500 MPH. Loaded with 10k+ gallons of fuel. But they should have survived anyways!

I mean, not the much larger planes that were used in 2001. Nor at upwards of 500 MPH. Loaded with 10k+ gallons of fuel. But they should have survived anyways!

And they did initially survive proving those theoretical calculations valid. If the damage from the impacts hadn't compromised the passive and active fire protection systems or sparked a large enough fire in concert they might would have avoided an outright collapse. That's a sentiment most that are active here I think share.

But thats' my point you have the collapses that already took place. There are valid reasons to explain the "why and how" question that is seldom considered by people that jump to a controlled demolition as their only rational answer

And they did initially survive proving those theoretical calculations valid. If the damage from the impacts hadn't compromised the passive and active fire protection systems or sparked a large enough fire in concert they might would have avoided an outright collapse. That's a sentiment most that are active here I think share.

Yeah, it's always been the truther position that the airliner impacts alone couldn't have caused the collapses, and the fires alone couldn't have caused the collapses, so something else must have caused the collapses; the idea that two causes of damage can result in more damage together than one of them separately doesn't seem plausible to them, even though I'd expect an averagely intelligent five-year-old to understand it. I think the gradual realisation that airliner impact plus fire creates more damage than airliner impact alone or fire alone was part of the cultural shift towards treating WTC7 as the real smoking gun; it was too obvious that none of the other smoking things were actually guns.

Dave

__________________Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

And they did initially survive proving those theoretical calculations valid. If the damage from the impacts hadn't compromised the passive and active fire protection systems or sparked a large enough fire in concert they might would have avoided an outright collapse. That's a sentiment most that are active here I think share.

But thats' my point you have the collapses that already took place. There are valid reasons to explain the "why and how" question that is seldom considered by people that jump to a controlled demolition as their only rational answer

It amazes me to this day the thought that if the fires were controllable and didn't destroy the safety measures in place, the towers probably survive with maybe partial collapse in some localized areas.

Truthers aren't interested in the real reasons, only ways to question what they view as the official explanation because they want to feel like they are smarter than everyone and they proved impossible happened.

Talk about hitting bottom and still digging. The clown car that is 9/11 Truth just doesn't know when to quit - the tires are flat, its out of gas, gears are grinding, smoke pouring out, the passengers just sit there with their whoopie cushions and palm buzzers and squirting flowers and yet they think they're getting somewhere. Funny as hell.

I think the inside of a clown car is a lot more crowded than the truther movement is.

... I think the gradual realisation that airliner impact plus fire creates more damage than airliner impact alone or fire alone was part of the cultural shift towards treating WTC7 as the real smoking gun; it was too obvious that none of the other smoking things were actually guns.

Dave

Agreed it is part of the reason for the shift to WTC7 focus.

however I think there is a more fundamental reason. There is no doubt the strategic focus shifted to WTC7 - whether explicit strategic decision or simply a natural drift is hard to tell. I think it just happend but...this is what I've been asserting as the reason - whether explicit or implicitly intended.

The focus had been on CD at the twin towers - so that is the technical topic. But there has never been a valid pro-CD hypothesis that survived the first rounds of debate. Most focus on anomalous issues which truthers did not understand. Out of context. No coherent argument.

And "debunkers" (it started before that term and the truther debunker two sides only polarisation but I'll stay with those terms.) - so "debunkers" had adopted the practice of explaining the anomalies and to do so had to address the issue itself PLUS the challenge to define what the truthers could not define and putting it into a context.

In doing so "we" were accepting de-facto burden of proof. I've said it many times - I doubt there is a significant truther claim that does not rely on "Reversed Burden of DISproof" - sorry for the double negative framing.

Along came WTC7 - all the details hidden - harder for debunkers to DISprove CD - what the truthers still couldn't prove but harder for "us" to disprove. Esp to a bunch of conspiracy obsessed lay persons.

If we overlook the inherently dubious logic of "cannot prove a negative" there was more than sufficient visual evidence for the "Twins" to DISprove CD. Or if I'm in a good mood and being scientific method rigorous - to prove "CD assistance was not needed"

And "CD not needed" can be demonstrated to an honest layperson for the "Twins". It needs engineering/physics understanding to analyse the mechanisms hidden inside WTC 7. >>> "You cannot prove us wrong" trumpet the truthers. And - IMO far to often - "we" forget to open our response by saying "We don't have to....it's your BoP...but..."

Truthers had effectively lost the battle for CD with the Twins. Along came WTC7 - the evidence mostly hidden - a gift from the Gods for truthers since debunkers had long been accepting "Reversed Burden of DISproof". So arguably it is "our" fault. Shame on us.

The core of the truther position was simply that what they witnessed was simply not possible without some sort of intentional effort to take the buildings down... Building that are standing and strong do not and cannot drop to the ground in a few seconds from puny local fires. The planes did knock them down either. These collapses in the minds of the truthers were simply not possible from "natural"... ie fire related causes with some structural damage high up in the twins. How can a small section destroy by crushing something 7 or 8 times its size! When looked at in this mickey mouse manner... extremely naive... the WTC looks like 3 CDs or man made engineered destruction.

Other observations deemed impossible was very novice pilots hitting the targets.

It's disbelief informed by technical ignorance... observations with the mind of a child. No need to make an affirmative case. It wasn't natural and so it had to be man caused.

The other side explained the observations as consistent with technical and engineering explanations. These drilled into the structure, physics and civil engineering... all of which was way way over the head of 99.999% of the truthers. the 0.001% who were capable of understanding simply ignored the engineered or looked from some minor nit to pick undermining the explanation which was 99.99% credible.

You can neither argue nor educate a truther. The former requires that they be technically up to speed and honest. And the latter is years of technical training... engineering and physics. Not happening... waste of time.

Idiots can and will be fooled. But many truthers are smart... just not about engineering and physics. The few who are willfully dishonest for some unexplained reason.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.